Judge: City to pay for lawyers

Deirdre Newman

The city must pay the attorney fees that a slow-growth group spent

suing the city over the criteria that triggers a public vote on

certain developments, an Orange County Superior Court judge ruled

Thursday.

Judge William Monroe said the city must pay $17,550 to the

Greenlight Steering Committee, validating the Newport Beach group’s

contention that its lawsuit forced the city to make changes to how

the Greenlight law -- Measure S, approved in 2000 -- was interpreted

regarding construction or expansion of hotels.

Greenlight votes are required on development proposals that exceed

by 40,000 square feet what is allowed in the city’s general plan. The

council ultimately changed the guidelines so that the trigger for a

vote for hotel developments is square footage, not the number of

rooms. The baseline allowed use for hotels is 1,000 square feet per

room.

While city officials had argued the lawsuit did not directly

inspire the changes that were made to the triggering criteria, Monroe

said it is unlikely that the City Council would have made any changes

without the “threat of litigation.”

Greenlight spokesman Phil Arst expressed delight at the ruling.

“It’s a complete vindication of our position,” Arst said. “The

judge, in all his points, ruled in our favor and awarded basically

the full amount that we paid to the attorneys.”

Catherine Engberg, outside counsel working for the city from the

San Francisco law firm of Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger, said she was

disappointed in the ruling.

“Throughout this process, we believe that the Greenlight Steering

Committee did not cause the city to amend the Measure S guidelines,”

Engberg said. “Rather, the city was in the process of amending the

guidelines when the Greenlight folks prematurely filed suit.”

Greenlight, an organization that coalesced over the need to reduce

traffic congestion caused by development projects, filed its lawsuit

in April. The changes were made on June 8. But when the city first

intended to make the changes is still a matter of debate. Monroe said

the “city presented no intention of making the amendment prior to the

filing of the lawsuit.”

Engberg disagreed. The council looked closely at making changes in

February and March, she said.

“We’re not really sure why the judge said the City Council didn’t

do anything until [the lawsuit was filed],” she said. “It’s

inaccurate.”

The committee requested about $30,000 in fees, which represents

the actual amount in attorney fees it paid. But the judge ruled that

the city has to pay only $17,550 -- the discounted amount the

committee was charged, since it is a citizens group. The payment is

due by Nov. 1.

Mayor Tod Ridgeway said the council will consider whether to

appeal the ruling in closed session on Tuesday. Because it will be

discussed in closed session, he can’t comment on the issue, he said.

* DEIRDRE NEWMAN covers government. She may be reached at (714)

966-4623 or by e-mail at deirdre.newman@latimes.com.